Patent Litigation

News & Analysis as of

Catalog Search Posted On Claim Preclusion Does Not Bar Additional Discovery Relating to Privity Challenge in Later-Filed IPR...

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board recently designated a decision granting a request for additional discovery as an informative opinion. Informative opinions are not binding; they rather provide guidance on rules and...more

Takeda Pharms. U.S.A., Inc. v. West-Ward Pharm. Corp.

Case Name: Takeda Pharms. U.S.A., Inc. v. West-Ward Pharm. Corp., 785 F.3d 625 (Fed. Cir. May 6, 2015) (Circuit Judges Newman, Dyk, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Dyk, J.; Dissent by Newman, J.) (Appeal from D. Del.,...more

Just Perfect: Compensatory Patent Damages in Apotex Inc v Merck & Co, Inc

The Federal Court of Appeal has decided that when computing compensatory damages for patent infringement, the availability of a non-infringing alternative is now a legally relevant consideration that can reduce the lost...more

Inequitable Conduct Is Sufficiently Pled

Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s renewed motion to dismiss and strike inequitable conduct allegations against Clean Harbors is granted as unopposed. Plaintiff’s renewed motion to dismiss and strike inequitable conduct allegations...more

District Court Strikes "Shotgun Complaint" That Incorporated Allegations by Reference in Each Count

Lanard Toys Limited ("Lanard") filed a patent infringement action against Toys "R" US. Lanard subsequently filed a four-count Amended Complaint and Demand for Trial by Jury, both of which were filed in the United States...more

PTAB Opens Door for Amendments in Post-Grant Review Proceedings

In a decision that sends a clear message to Patent Owners that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is opening the door for amendments in post grant review proceedings, on July 15, 2015 the PTAB issued a new order...more

AstraZeneca LP v. Breath Ltd.

Case Name: AstraZeneca LP v. Breath Ltd., 2015-1335, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 7525 (Fed. Cir. May 7, 2015) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Pulmicort Respules® (budesonide inhalation suspension); U.S. Patent No....more

FTC Commissioners Weigh in on FRAND Debate

Two weeks ago, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chairwoman Edith Ramirez, writing on her own behalf, submitted comments in Investigation No. 337-TA-613, Certain 3G Mobile Handsets and Components Thereof (the 613 Investigation)...more

PTAB Average Time-To-Decision in IPRs May Surprise You

This post was co-authored by Foley & Lardner Summer Associate Jonathan E. Robe. Ever wonder how long it takes the PTAB to decide to institute trial? Ever have someone ask how long it will take for the Board to issue its...more

The European Court of Justice on Enforcement of FRAND Patents: Huawei v. ZTE

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) rendered its highly anticipated ruling in Huawei v. ZTE on the enforcement of standard essential patents (SEPs) which are subject to a FRAND commitment. SEPs play a significant role in the...more

CBO Provides Cost Estimate to Government to Implement Innovation Act

Earlier this month, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) issued a cost estimate for the Innovation Act (H.R. 9). The bill, which was introduced in February, was reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary in June. The...more

Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Elan Pharms., Inc.

Case Name: Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Elan Pharms., Inc., 786 F.3d 892 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2015) (Circuit Judges Prost and Lourie, and District Judge Gilstrap presiding; Opinion by Lourie, J.) (Appeal from D. Md.,...more

Kaneka v. Xiamen Kingdomway Group: Implicit Order Read into Method Steps of Industrial Biotechnology Patent

The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Group Co. (Fed. Cir. 2015) serves as a reminder that courts may implicitly read an order into a patent’s method claim steps, even if the applicant did...more

Sarvint Retains Jurisdiction in the Northern District in Another Order from Judge Batten

Judge Batten denied a motion brought by Carré Technologies, Inc. (“Carré”) to dismiss[i] apatent infringement action brought by Sarvint Technologies, Inc. (“Sarvint”) for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Court began by...more

Court Report - July 2015 #3

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Hetero Labs Ltd, Unit V et al. v. Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. LLC 1:15-cv-05396; filed June 18, 2015 in the Northern District...more

Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Watson Labs., Inc.

Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Watson Labs., Inc., Fed. Cir. Nos. 2014-1799, -1800, 2015-1061, -1062, -1120, -1121, -1141, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 8374 (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2015) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Taranto, and Hughes...more

Smartflash v. Apple: After $500M Verdict, District Court Grants New Trial on Damages Based on Improper Use of Entire Market Value...

After a jury returned a verdict against Apple, Apple filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial. The district court subsequently notified the parties pursuant to Rule 59(d) that it was considering granting...more

Doubling Down on Idle Free

In Masterimage 3D, Inc. v. Reald Inc., IPR2015-00040, Paper 42 (July 15, 2015), the Board instructed that patent owners seeking to amend their applications should still follow all of the requirements set forth in Idle Free...more

Lessons From The 1st Biopharma Inter Partes Reviews

Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued its first set of final written decisions in three inter partes reviews relating to molecules in the large molecule biopharma space (IPR2013-00534, IPR2013-00535 and...more

EU Court Clarifies the Conditions Under Which Assertion of Standard-Essential Patents May Constitute Abuse of Market Dominance

Last week, in response to a request for a preliminary ruling by a German court hearing a patent infringement action brought by Huawei against ZTE, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) took up the question of...more

"Don't Stop the Dance"[*] -- The Dissents-in-Part from Amgen v. Sandoz

As we have been reporting this week, the Federal Circuit handed down its decision in Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. -- a case of first impression relating to the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act ("BPCIA") for...more

The Court of Justice’s Preliminary Ruling in Huawei v. ZTE: The Final Word?

The application of competition law to standard essential patents (SEPs) has been the subject of significant debate. The latest instalment was provided by the Court of Justice on 16 July 2015 with its much-anticipated...more

Shire Development, LLC v. Watson Pharms., Inc.

Case Name: Shire Development, LLC v. Watson Pharms., Inc., 787 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2015) (Circuit Judges Prost, Chen, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Hughes, J.) (Appeal from S.D. Fla., Middlebrooks, J.) - Drug...more

“Symmetrically Arranged” Buttons: A Patent Win for Nintendo

Nintendo has been making headlines recently. The gaming industry is in mounrning over the unfortunate passing of Nintendo CEO Satoru Iwata last week. Iwata was instrumental in the success of the Nintendo Wii, among other...more

A Fractured Federal Circuit Panel Interprets The Biosimilars Patent Resolution Procedures

On July 21, the Federal Circuit interpreted the patent litigation procedures and requirements of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), including whether a company submitting an abbreviated BLA (“k...more

2,249 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 90

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×